jamie - petition

8/3/2019 Jamie - Petition

1/6

REPUBLIC OF THE PHILIPPINES

REGIONAL TRIAL COURT

NATIONAL CAPITAL REGION

Branch ____, Makati City

BIANCA FERRER-PEREZ,

Petitioner,

-versus- CIVIL CASE No. Q-

11-38476For: Declaration of Nullity

of

Marriage and Dissolution

of

Absolute Community of

Property

ALEX PEREZ, Respondent.

x-------------------------------------------x

PETITION

Petitioner, BIANCA FERRER-PEREZ, by counsel, to this

Honorable Court most respectfully states:

1. Petitioner BIANCA FERRER-PEREZ is of legal age, married,

Filipino and presently residing at Unit No. 12 Neptune St.,

Bel-Air Village, Makati City. She may be served with

judgments, orders, pleadings and other lawful court

processes through the undersigned counsels office address

provided hereunder.

2. Respondent ALEX PEREZ is of legal age, married, Filipino,

and presently residing at No. 39 Abueva St., Corinthian

Gardens, Quezon City, where he may be served with

Summons and other lawful court processes. He may likewise

be served with Summons and other lawful court processes at


2/6

North Expressway Motorist Station at 1160 EDSA Balintawak,

Quezon City.

3. On 14 February 2008, petitioner and respondent met at

Northwest Airlines Flight 73. Petitioner was a flightattendant of the said airline while respondent was a

passenger for the said flight. During the flight, respondent

expressed interest in petitioner by initiating short

conversations with petitioner during the flight.

4. Their romance was beginning to blossom. Petitioner and

respondent started to go out on dates when respondent was

not assigned abroad. After a few weeks, the parties started

going steady and officially became a couple.

5. After one of petitioners flight assignments, respondent

picked a fight with petitioner, accusing the latter of having

an affair with one of her colleagues who was her former

boyfriend of several years. At one point, as respondent was

fetching petitioner at Ninoy Aquino International Airport, he

suddenly rushed towards a male flight attendant and

grabbed him. He then threatened the male attendant not to

come near petitioner or else he would knock your head off.

Thereafter, he scolded petitioner for allegedly flirting with

said male colleague. Despite her reassurance that she was

faithful to respondent, he refused to accept such statements.

6. Oftentimes, respondent would dictate to petitioner her

schedule while she was not assigned by her employer to a

flight demanding that she spend most of her time with him

than with her friends. Petitioner acceded to his requests onthe belief that he just missed her while she was away.

7. On December 2008, petitioner and respondent took a

vacation in the United States. While celebrating New Years

Eve at Peppermill Hotel in Reno, Nevada, the couple out of

sheer and fun and in a state of insobriety, decided to spice

up their vacation by trying out one of the quickie marriage

booths before flying back to Manila. (A copy of the

marriage certificate is attached hereto as Annex A andmade an integral part hereof.)

8. Upon their return, petitioner and respondent decided to rent

a condominium unit in Galeria de Magallanes, Makati City

where they lived together as husband and wife.


3/6

9. Petitioner still continued to be a flight attendant at

Northwest Airlines (now Delta Airlines) while respondent

continued to operate his Caltex Station and 24-hour

convenience store at EDSA. Due to the nature of their

respective careers, the couple spent most of their timeapart.

10. Although their relationship started to crumble,

petitioner still exerted efforts at restoring their relationship

by maintaining constant communication with respondent

during her international assignments. Nevertheless,

respondent used his work as an excuse in failing to return

her calls.

11. When petitioner would call respondent at night,

thinking that he would be at home, respondent would not be

able to talk to petitioner as he would be out on drinking

sprees at friends houses or playing poker at Midas Casino at

Pasig City with his high school barkada.

12. During the times that petitioner would be in Manila,

respondent would often quarrel with petitioner over trivial

matters such as the way she prepares the food or cleans the

house. His short temper would also lead to arguments about

her work and how she was never at home and would just

leave the house without any attempt to resolve their

differences.

13. At one of the instances when she was doing her general

cleaning of their conjugal home, she chanced upon

respondents open laptop which displayed pictures of himwith several other women in compromising poses as screen

savers. Upon browsing through his laptop, petitioner saw

obscene video footages of respondent with women he was

having sexual relations with. When confronted by petitioner,

respondent merely stated that it was petitioners fault as she

was an absentee wife and also claimed that petitioner was

also as promiscuous as he flirting with her ex-

boyfriend/colleague.14. It has come to a point that petitioner could no longer

endure the emotional trauma brought by respondents lack

of love and respect for petitioner as his wife. Petitioner

became distraught with the discovery of his promiscuity that


4/6

led her to refuse any sexual advances made by respondent

to her.

15.In a psychological report dated 18 August 2011, petitioner

and respondents were both found to be psychologicallyincapacitated and that such already existed before

marriage, but became manifest only after the

celebration which prevented both from complying with

their essential marital obligations. (Hereto attached as

Annex B and made an integral part hereof.)

16.The psychological incapacities of the parties are considered

severe and grave in degree, because both disorders

hampered, disrupted and interfered with their normalfunctioning that affected the totality of their marital

relationship. Both incapacities are found to be permanent in

nature, because both started early in their psychological

development, that the pattern of their behavior became so

deeply engrained into their personality structures that no

amount of psychiatric or professional assistance can modify

or change it.

17.Since there was no property agreement or settlement

entered by the parties prior to the marriage, their property

relations is governed by the absolute community of property

system pursuant to Article 75 of the Family Code. The

parties did not have property at the time of the celebration

of the marriage. Neither did they acquire any property

during the marriage and the absolute community has no

debts at the time of the filing of this petition.

Prayer

WHEREFORE, premises considered, petitioner BIANCA

FERRER-PEREZ most respectfully prays that this Honorable

Court, after due hearing, declare the marriage of the parties

VOID AB INITIO on the ground of petitioner and respondents

psychological incapacity under Art. 36 of the Family Code.

Other reliefs, just and equitable under the circumstances,

are likewise prayed for.


5/6

Makati City, 12 June 2011.

CCAAB Law OfficesPenthouse Suite, Finlandia Building,

Legaspi Street, Salcedo Village, Makati City, 1385Tel. No. 8347397; 8750254

By:

JENNIFER ANNE MARIE D. CRUZRoll No. 59345IBP No. 823956; 1/12/12; Makati City

PTR No. 5692304; 1/12/12; Makati CityMCLE Compliance No. III-0019365

VERIFICATION AND CERTIFICATION OF

NON-FORUM SHOPPING

I, BIANCA FERRER-PEREZ, of legal age, married, Filipinoand presently residing at Unit No. 12 Neptune St., Bel-Air Village,


6/6

Makati City. after having been duly sworn in accordance withlaw, hereby depose and state that:

1. I am the petitioner in the above entitled case;

2. I have caused the preparation and filing of theforegoing Petition and have read and understood all theallegations contained therein, and the same are true andcorrect of my own personal knowledge based on authenticrecords;

2. I have not commenced any other action or filed anyclaim involving the same issues in any court, tribunal orquasi-judicial agency.

3. If I should thereafter learn that a similar action hasbeen filed or is pending, I shall report such fact to thisHonorable Court within five (5) days from knowledge thereof.

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have set my hand and affixedmy signature this _____ day of June 2011 in Makati City.

BIANCA FERRER-PEREZAffiant

SUBSCRIBED AND SWORN to before me this _____ day ofJune 2011 in Makati City, with affiant exhibiting to me her________________________.

Doc. No. ____;Page No. ____;Book No. ____;Series of 2011.

jamie - petition

Documents